User talk:TimeMaster/Sandbox
Very nice idea! Very wikipedia-like... We should also vote more on the FA-proposals and put a new article on the Main Page - the Lovely has been featured for years now, which is kinda lame... I love this idea. The Master's Voice 20:52, July 6, 2011 (UTC) :I don't agree. We already have "star" articles, which is enough. I know that nobody is going to scan a thousand articles and put them in categories. And to be honest, I don't think it will improve the atmosphere of the wiki. And also: B-rated largely accurate?? All pages should be accurate... And all pages that are not related to Lovia could be deleted, even if they are very well written. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 06:16, July 7, 2011 (UTC) ::But didn't we have Featured Articles that could be voted on? They kinda died a silent death, as nobody votes on these articles anymore and no new ones are added. The same article has been Featured on the Main Page for years already... The Master's Voice 09:16, July 7, 2011 (UTC) :::Then I'd propose we simply start creating some good quality stuff and reactivate FA :) On a small scale wiki only FA is enough. Making a thousand categories won't work. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:03, July 7, 2011 (UTC) ::::First, let us take a look at whatever is already in here... I see many candidates for FA-status and as it looks now, they would all pass. The Master's Voice 11:30, July 7, 2011 (UTC) A lot of pages are inaccurate, for example, they do not list important events, link to the wrong page, etc. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:44, July 7, 2011 (UTC) :Also, I think we should delete everything that is not faintly important to Lovia, which would be all of the royal family people from Brunant that Horton added and maybe and some other things he made, and maybe that some other people made that are stubs. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:46, July 7, 2011 (UTC) ::A good point. Also, there are many pages on people without an image - they should all get an image, or be removed. I mean, if a person is not important enough to have an image, why would they important enough to have an article? Especially if it's just three or four lines of text and badly written or linked. The Master's Voice 14:19, July 7, 2011 (UTC) :::I agree about the Brunant things. @TMV: no, it's that if you have a lot of people to describe, eventually you'll run out of free-use images that are suitable. It's a problem I'm having right now, so no image available, doesn't mean the guy is not important enough. It just means that we aren't violating the copyright laws. Better no image than a bad image :) --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:27, July 8, 2011 (UTC) I don't like copyright laws. . . they should be shortened to author's life plus nothing. But anyway, I don't agree with the image thing. They should just not be a stub and be (sort of) important to Lovia. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 13:51, July 8, 2011 (UTC) :Unfortunately, we have to keep to copyright laws, because you don't want Wikia to take this site offline because of that. It has happened before to other sites. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 11:40, July 9, 2011 (UTC) But can't we just remove it if the copyright holders ask us to? —TimeMaster (talk • ) 17:06, July 9, 2011 (UTC) :Sure, but if we keep on uploading "wrong" images, they'll block or the users or (when it's a general problem) the site. --OuWTBsjrief-mich 09:48, July 10, 2011 (UTC) Just a though... TM, just a thought: take a look at this nice old proposal of yours. It sure sounds a lot nicer then just deleting a bunch of articles. The Master's Voice 16:18, July 15, 2011 (UTC) :Yeah, I agree. I just don't know how to make the Template:Quality less crappy and maybe more specific. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 16:20, July 15, 2011 (UTC) ::I'd help you if I could... text-editing and codes and stuff just aren't exactly my cup of tea. I'm sure someone on here is a bigger nerd then us and knows how it works. The Master's Voice 16:26, July 15, 2011 (UTC) :::Well, I know how to make it work, but not how to make it look good. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 16:42, July 15, 2011 (UTC) ::::Then you beat me at it: I cannot do either. Instead, I have a girlfriend. The Master's Voice 17:14, July 15, 2011 (UTC) :::::I like the Article Quality act, but there are way too many categories there. I swear even Wikipedia doesn't have that many. 4 is enough IMO. --Semyon 15:00, December 23, 2011 (UTC) ::::::Wikipedia has that many, trust me. One more, even. I just got rid of Good Article (replaced solely with A) and changed Start to D. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 15:21, December 23, 2011 (UTC)